DOCSLIB.ORG

POET and COURT Gregor Weber Beginning from an Overview of Hellenistic Monarchy This Conribution Turns First to Ptolemy I And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Originalveröffentlichung in: Benjamin Acosta-Hughes, Luigi Lehnus, Susan Stephens (Hg.), Brill’s companion to Callimachus, Leiden ; Boston 2011, S. 224-244 CHAPTER ELEVEN POET AND COURT Gregor Weber A bstract Begin ning from an overview of Hellenistic monarchy this conribution turns first to Ptolemy I and his need for a royal court to establish himself in Egypt. Intellectuals in a variety of areas at the Ptolemaic court contributed in a major way to this development, intellectuals who were also in large part also friends of the King. We should understand Callimachus and his work in this context: the court with its personalities and events gave him material for poetic cre­ ation, and ensured its reception. The variety of his work can be understood as a reflection of the character of the court as political, administrative, intellec­ tual, and social center—for Callimachus and his fellow poets were informed by the court’s structures of communication and interaction. These structures also make it possible for us to consider the contexts of publication and per­ formance, as well as audience. When Alexander the Great died in July 323 bc , not only had he failed to settle his succession, but it was also an open question how the Greek world would develop in the newly conquered regions of his vast empire.1 At first Alexander’s closest confidants split the satrapies up among themselves and governed them on behalf of Alexander’s son (also named Alexander) and feeble-minded half brother, Philip III Arrhidaeus, but soon enough there was a state of constant warfare among the Successors. In this series of conflicts, all the other combat ­ ants would invariably combine against the one who appeared to be the strongest at the time, resulting in a constant reduction in the number Throughout this chapter, volume 6 of W. Peremans, Prosopographia Ptolemaica (Louvain, 1968), will be abbreviated as PP VI. I thank Benjamin Acosta-Hughes lor the invitation to contribute to this volume, which I gladly undertook, especially because of the memory of our time studying together in Freiburg. 1 thank also Jurgen Nalitz and Susan Stephens for several important suggestions. Christopher Schliephake helped with bibliography and proofreading. ' Possible options: Weber 2007a: 256-258. 226 GREGOR WEBER of contestants. 2 After Alexander’s son and sister died, a new state of affairs emerged, in that each of the main players one after another pro ­ claimed himself king, or rather was so acclaimed by his troops. 3 This step was to prove rich in consequences, since kings like Lysimachus, Seleucus, Antigonus, and Ptolemy were now faced with a difficult task: they had to present themselves in the lands they occupied as legitimate rulers and win acceptance among the various peoples, or else establish robust structures for their rule, since they were each still exposed to the attacks of their competitors. As different as their relationships with their kingdoms appeared in detail, all the new Hellenistic monarchs were faced with a similar situation. What was crucial in the establishment of Hellenistic monarchies is encapsulated in the entry BaoiXeta in the Suda, a Byzantine lexicon of the tenth century ad : oike cpxxnq oike to Svkcuov arcoSffioum xoTq avGpcbrcoiq xaq paaiXeiaq, aXXa xoT<; Suvagevotq qyeiaGat, axpaxojteSot) mi yeipi^eiv Ttpdypaxa vouveycoq. 4 The Hellenistic king had first of all to be a successful military general; 5 a king could manage his so-called Tcpaypaxa only if he had reliable helpers beneath him, had set up an administrative and political center, and could deploy adequate financial resources, which he had to draw from his own territory. These were essential to pay for troops, mostly mercenaries, as well as for a residence that could be the foundation for satisfactory royal self-fashioning —for a king required a whole infra­ structure compartmentalized in accordance with his needs, with rooms for audiences, feasts, and symposia, as well as storerooms and living quarters.6 Besides all this, he had to keep an eye on his acceptance as a Graeco-Macedonian king (PaoiXeuq) and deport himself, whether through military aid, foundations, financial expenditure, or other acts of generosity, as Savior (Icoxfip) and Benefactor (Euepyexqq) before the Greek public. Hellenistic monarchy, therefore, entailed personal rule and centered on the king ’s affairs (xa jtpaypaxa) and on his household (oiicoq; Virgilio 1994: 163-164). 2 This phase lasted, with shifting coalitions, for a good fifty years, till 272 bc; see further Braund 2003; Bosworth 2006; Malitz 2007: 23-36. 3 On the Year of the Kings ((306/5 bc), see Plut. Demetr. 18 and P. Koln 6.247 with O. Muller 1973; Gehrke 2003: 39 and 167-168; M.M. Austin 2006: no. 44. 4 Translation in M.M. Austin 2006: no. 45: “Monarchy. It is neither descent nor legitimacy which gives monarchies to men, but the ability to command an army and to handle affairs competently. ” See further on this Gehrke 2003: 46-49. 5 Hence the title of Gehrke 1982. 6 The evidence is reviewed by Nielsen 1999, though often with excessively confident identifications; see Vossing 2004: 100-106. POET AND COURT 227 The development of a court soon came to be seen as an indispens­ able ingredient in the organization of a kingdom; moreover, as an expanded version of the royal household it represented the spatial center that the king inhabited.7 From here he administered the fate of his sovereign territory, and here, in festivals and other performances, he put his kingdom on show. 8 Above all, though, the king surrounded himself with people who helped him cope with his various duties, on whom he could rely, and in whose company he appeared on many different occasions: these were the king ’s Companions (cpitan), who, along with the royal family, the royal servants, and individuals residing on a temporary basis at the court (ambassadors, for instance), made up court society. Among these Companions the king also convened the royal council (cruvedptov), and made public displays of communality at feasts (ouvouoiai) and drinking parties (txupTtooia). 9 It goes almost without saying that such gatherings were a locus of conflicts, since within the court circle (which was in no sense hermetically sealed to outsiders) there was fierce competition for royal favor. 10 The king in his turn had to fulfill expectations, and thus minimize potential threats, through donations of land and money, the distribution of prestigious priesthoods, or the dedication of statues (Habicht 1958: 4, 10-12; Sei­ bert 1991). Even members of the royal family could represent a source of anxiety, since the existence of pretenders to the throne born from different marriages could lead to friction in the absence of clear rules of succession. (Ogden 1999 is fundamental here.) How the new elite 7 On what follows: Weber 1993: 20-32; Herman 1997; Weber 1997; Winterling 1998: 661-662. It is illuminating that the phrases to PaaiAxiov or xa PacuXeia, which at first meant only “the royal ” and required an explanatory noun, came to limit a specific space belonging to the king. At the same time the word av>Xr\ (“court”), which seems to have emerged first in the context of Hellenistic courts, had similar spatial connotations while also containing within its field of meaning the idea of court society (Funck 1996: 52). The royal court in Pella had already been specially constructed, even though the norm under Alexander, if we disregard the final stage of his expedition (n Babylon, was really a traveling court. The nature of the court as a military camp. Unposed by the necessities of war, meant that the royal tent (cncrivfi) —equipped with everything that was required for organization and representation —became a visual and symbolic center. 8 See on this Weber 2007c: 102-111. Luxury (xpu<pr|) would become one of the characteristic features of the Hellenistic monarchs in comparison with the Roman nobiles ; see on this Heinen 1983. 9 On the forms of court life, see Weber 1997: 43-46; Asper 2004: 7-9; Strootman 2005b: 191-92. On the symposium and the rich tradition of anecdotes associated with «. see Vossing 2004: 86-92. 10 On the competition, see Polybius 4.874-85 with Herman 1997: 210-211; Meissner 2 °00: 9-10 nn. 27, 28. 228 GREGOR WEBER was made up—what regions and social classes the king ’s Compan ­ ions came from, what functions they had been installed to fulfill, and whether members of the former native upper class were represented— was consequently of great concern to every royal court.11 If we look more closely at the actions of Ptolemy I in the light of these considerations, peculiarities emerge. Ptolemy was the son of a Macedonian named Lagus, and as a member of Alexander’s bodyguard was a member of his closest circle of friends (ooopaTocputaxKei;). In the apportioning of the satrapies in the wake of Alexander’s death, he secured Egypt and not only defended his sovereign territory but was also able to extend it to include Cyrene, part of Asia Minor, and a num­ ber of the Aegean islands.12 Problems within the family, which resulted from passing over the older Ptolemy Ceraunus (Lightning Bolt), the king ’s son by Eurydice, in favor of a younger Ptolemy who was the result of the king ’s marriage to Berenice, were not replicated in subse­ quent dynastic history (Malitz 2007: 34-37). Ptolemy I had come upon considerable financial resources in Egypt, which he invested shrewdly in various projects. 13 One initiative concentrated on recruiting mer­ cenaries and putting the defense of Egypt on an effective footing. He also endeavored to win the good will of the Egyptian priestly elite from the beginning through donations and funds for repair work to sanc­ tuaries.14 Connected to this courting of the priestly class is another peculiarity of the Ptolemaic regime in Egypt, the “dual-faced” nature of the monarchy, in which Ptolemy was both basileus and pharaoh.
Recommended publications
  • The History of Egypt Under the Ptolemies

    The History of Egypt Under the Ptolemies

    UC-NRLF $C lb EbE THE HISTORY OF EGYPT THE PTOLEMIES. BY SAMUEL SHARPE. LONDON: EDWARD MOXON, DOVER STREET. 1838. 65 Printed by Arthur Taylor, Coleman Street. TO THE READER. The Author has given neither the arguments nor the whole of the authorities on which the sketch of the earlier history in the Introduction rests, as it would have had too much of the dryness of an antiquarian enquiry, and as he has already published them in his Early History of Egypt. In the rest of the book he has in every case pointed out in the margin the sources from which he has drawn his information. » Canonbury, 12th November, 1838. Works published by the same Author. The EARLY HISTORY of EGYPT, from the Old Testament, Herodotus, Manetho, and the Hieroglyphieal Inscriptions. EGYPTIAN INSCRIPTIONS, from the British Museum and other sources. Sixty Plates in folio. Rudiments of a VOCABULARY of EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS. M451 42 ERRATA. Page 103, line 23, for Syria read Macedonia. Page 104, line 4, for Syrians read Macedonians. CONTENTS. Introduction. Abraham : shepherd kings : Joseph : kings of Thebes : era ofMenophres, exodus of the Jews, Rameses the Great, buildings, conquests, popu- lation, mines: Shishank, B.C. 970: Solomon: kings of Tanis : Bocchoris of Sais : kings of Ethiopia, B. c. 730 .- kings ofSais : Africa is sailed round, Greek mercenaries and settlers, Solon and Pythagoras : Persian conquest, B.C. 525 .- Inarus rebels : Herodotus and Hellanicus : Amyrtaus, Nectanebo : Eudoxus, Chrysippus, and Plato : Alexander the Great : oasis of Ammon, native judges,
  • Water, Air and Fire at Work in Hero's Machines

    Water, Air and Fire at Work in Hero's Machines

    Water, air and fire at work in Hero’s machines Amelia Carolina Sparavigna Dipartimento di Fisica, Politecnico di Torino Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy Known as the Michanikos, Hero of Alexandria is considered the inventor of the world's first steam engine and of many other sophisticated devices. Here we discuss three of them as described in his book “Pneumatica”. These machines, working with water, air and fire, are clear examples of the deep knowledge of fluid dynamics reached by the Hellenistic scientists. Hero of Alexandria, known as the Mechanicos, lived during the first century in the Roman Egypt [1]. He was probably a Greek mathematician and engineer who resided in the city of Alexandria. We know his work from some of writings and designs that have been arrived nowadays in their Greek original or in Arabic translations. From his own writings, it is possible to gather that he knew the works of Archimedes and of Philo the Byzantian, who was a contemporary of Ctesibius [2]. It is almost certain that Heron taught at the Museum, a college for combined philosophy and literary studies and a religious place of cult of Muses, that included the famous Library. For this reason, Hero claimed himself a pupil of Ctesibius, who was probably the first head of the Museum of Alexandria. Most of Hero’s writings appear as lecture notes for courses in mathematics, mechanics, physics and pneumatics [2]. In optics, Hero formulated the Principle of the Shortest Path of Light, principle telling that if a ray of light propagates from a point to another one within the same medium, the followed path is the shortest possible.
  • The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle

    The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department Classics and Religious Studies July 2007 The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle Thomas Nelson Winter University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub Part of the Classics Commons Winter, Thomas Nelson, "The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle" (2007). Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department. 68. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub/68 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classics and Religious Studies at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Th e Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle Th omas N. Winter Lincoln, Nebraska • 2007 Translator’s Preface. Who Wrote the Mechanical Problems in the Aristotelian Corpus? When I was translating the Mechanical Problems, which I did from the TLG Greek text, I was still in the fundamentalist authorship mode: that it survives in the corpus of Aristotle was then for me prima facie Th is paper will: evidence that Aristotle was the author. And at many places I found in- 1) off er the plainest evidence yet that it is not Aristotle, and — 1 dications that the date of the work was apt for Aristotle. But eventually, 2) name an author. I saw a join in Vitruvius, as in the brief summary below, “Who Wrote Th at it is not Aristotle does not, so far, rest on evidence.
  • From Ancient Greece to Byzantium

    From Ancient Greece to Byzantium

    Proceedings of the European Control Conference 2007 TuA07.4 Kos, Greece, July 2-5, 2007 Technology and Autonomous Mechanisms in the Mediterranean: From Ancient Greece to Byzantium K. P. Valavanis, G. J. Vachtsevanos, P. J. Antsaklis Abstract – The paper aims at presenting each period are then provided followed by technology and automation advances in the accomplishments in automatic control and the ancient Greek World, offering evidence that transition from the ancient Greek world to the Greco- feedback control as a discipline dates back more Roman era and the Byzantium. than twenty five centuries. II. CHRONOLOGICAL MAP OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY I. INTRODUCTION It is worth noting that there was an initial phase of The paper objective is to present historical evidence imported influences in the development of ancient of achievements in science, technology and the Greek technology that reached the Greek states from making of automation in the ancient Greek world until the East (Persia, Babylon and Mesopotamia) and th the era of Byzantium and that the main driving force practiced by the Greeks up until the 6 century B.C. It behind Greek science [16] - [18] has been curiosity and was at the time of Thales of Miletus (circa 585 B.C.), desire for knowledge followed by the study of nature. when a very significant change occurred. A new and When focusing on the discipline of feedback control, exclusively Greek activity began to dominate any James Watt’s Flyball Governor (1769) may be inherited technology, called science. In subsequent considered as one of the earliest feedback control centuries, technology itself became more productive, devices of the modern era.
  • Table of Contents More Information

    Table of Contents More Information

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-76376-9 - The Mechanical Hypothesis in Ancient Greek Natural Philosophy Sylvia Berryman Table of Contents More information Contents List of illustrations page vii Acknowledgements viii Introduction 1 1 Mechanics and the mechanical: some problems of terminology 9 The critics of prevailing usage 11 Some candidate definitions of the ‘mechanistic’ 15 2 ‘Mechanistic’ thought before mechanics? 21 Divine versus human technology 24 Working artifacts before the fourth century 29 Ancient atomism and the machine analogy 34 The ‘shortfalls’ of ancient technology 39 The ‘exclusion’ of ancient mechanics 43 3 Mechanics in the fourth century 54 The scope of ancient Greek mechanics 55 Archytas and the foundation of mechanics 87 Aristotle’s ‘mechanics’ of motion 97 Conclusion 104 4 The theory and practice of ancient Greek mechanics 105 The Aristotelian Mechanica 106 Ctesibius 115 Archimedes 117 Philo of Byzantium 123 v © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-76376-9 - The Mechanical Hypothesis in Ancient Greek Natural Philosophy Sylvia Berryman Table of Contents More information vi Contents Vitruvius 130 Hero of Alexandria 134 Pappus of Alexandria 143 Models of the heavens 146 5 Ancient Greek mechanics continued: the case of pneumatics 155 Pneumatic technology in the post-classical period 157 Ancient Greek pneumatic theory 165 The status of mechanics revisited: natural or artificial? 170 6 The philosophical reception of mechanics in antiquity 177 Mechanical theory in natural philosophy 179 The theory of pneumatics in natural philosophy 191 Pneumatics and medical theory 197 Working artifacts and the notion of a self-mover 201 Mechanical analogies for the functioning of organisms 205 Working artifacts in astronomy 216 Mechanical analogies in cosmology 220 Conclusion 231 Appendix: Ancient mechanics and the mechanical in the seventeenth century 236 Bibliography 250 Index of passages 274 General index 282 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org.
  • Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult

    Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult

    ΑΡΣΙΝΟΗ ΕΥΠΛΟΙΑ Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult Carlos Francis Robinson Bachelor of Arts (Hons. 1) A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2019 Historical and Philosophical Inquiry Abstract Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult By the early Hellenistic period a trend was emerging in which royal women were deified as Aphrodite. In a unique innovation, Queen Arsinoë II of Egypt (c. 316 – 270 BC) was deified as the maritime Aphrodite, and was associated with the cult titles Euploia, Akraia, and Galenaië. It was the important study of Robert (1966) which identified that the poets Posidippus and Callimachus were honouring Arsinoë II as the maritime Aphrodite. This thesis examines how this new third-century BC cult of ‘Arsinoë Aphrodite’ adopted aspects of Greek cults of the maritime Aphrodite, creating a new derivative cult. The main historical sources for this cult are the epigrams of Posidippus and Callimachus, including a relatively new epigram (Posidippus AB 39) published in 2001. This thesis demonstrates that the new cult of Arsinoë Aphrodite utilised existing traditions, such as: Aphrodite’s role as patron of fleets, the practice of dedications to Aphrodite by admirals, the use of invocations before sailing, and the practice of marine dedications such as shells. In this way the Ptolemies incorporated existing religious traditions into a new form of ruler cult. This study is the first attempt to trace the direct relationship between Ptolemaic ruler cult and existing traditions of the maritime Aphrodite, and deepens our understanding of the strategies of ruler cult adopted in the early Hellenistic period.
  • Hellenistic Poetry Before Callimachus an Enquiry Into Two Lost Generations University of Liverpool, 14-15 June 2016

    Hellenistic Poetry Before Callimachus an Enquiry Into Two Lost Generations University of Liverpool, 14-15 June 2016

    Hellenistic Poetry Before Callimachus An Enquiry Into Two Lost Generations University of Liverpool, 14-15 June 2016 Ewen Bowie (Oxford) Pauline LeVen (Yale) School of the Arts Library Benjamin Cartlidge (Oxford) Enrico Magnelli (Florence) 19 Abercromby Square Martine Cuypers (TCD) Thomas Nelson (Cambridge) Marco Fantuzzi (Macerata) Maria Noussia (Thessaloniki) L69 7ZG Liverpool Lucia Floridi (Milan) S. Douglas Olson (Freiburg) Marco Perale Annette Harder (Groningen) Peter Parsons (Oxford) [email protected] Richard Hunter (Cambridge) Marco Perale (Liverpool) Guendalina Taietti Gregory Hutchinson (Oxford) K. Spanoudakis (Rethymno) [email protected] Jan Kwapisz (Warsaw) Guenda Taietti (Liverpool) Jan Kwapisz Rebecca Lämmle (Basel) Agnieszka Toma (Wrocław) [email protected] Hellenistic Poetry before Callimachus An international conference at the University of Liverpool 14-15 June 2016 You who walk past my tomb, know that I am son and father of Callimachus of Cyrene. You must know both: the one led his country’s forces once, the other sang beyond the reach of envy. Callimachus, Epigram 21 Pf., tr. F.J. Nisetich Callimachus’ epitaph for the tomb of his father is notorious for how perplexingly little it says about the deceased. We are told neither his name nor profession, whereas the name that resounds loud and clear is that of the author of the epigram. This is a measure of how Callimachus outshone his father. The Greeks may have found delight in being defeated by their children (cf. Pl. Mx. 247a), yet we are less impressed. Even for the sake of Callimachus himself, would it not be rewarding to know who his father was? The epigram illustrates the broader problem we have with the poet’s closest literary ancestors.
  • A Short History of Greek Mathematics

    A Short History of Greek Mathematics

    Cambridge Library Co ll e C t i o n Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century, Latin and Greek were compulsory subjects in almost all European universities, and most early modern scholars published their research and conducted international correspondence in Latin. Latin had continued in use in Western Europe long after the fall of the Roman empire as the lingua franca of the educated classes and of law, diplomacy, religion and university teaching. The flight of Greek scholars to the West after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 gave impetus to the study of ancient Greek literature and the Greek New Testament. Eventually, just as nineteenth-century reforms of university curricula were beginning to erode this ascendancy, developments in textual criticism and linguistic analysis, and new ways of studying ancient societies, especially archaeology, led to renewed enthusiasm for the Classics. This collection offers works of criticism, interpretation and synthesis by the outstanding scholars of the nineteenth century. A Short History of Greek Mathematics James Gow’s Short History of Greek Mathematics (1884) provided the first full account of the subject available in English, and it today remains a clear and thorough guide to early arithmetic and geometry. Beginning with the origins of the numerical system and proceeding through the theorems of Pythagoras, Euclid, Archimedes and many others, the Short History offers in-depth analysis and useful translations of individual texts as well as a broad historical overview of the development of mathematics. Parts I and II concern Greek arithmetic, including the origin of alphabetic numerals and the nomenclature for operations; Part III constitutes a complete history of Greek geometry, from its earliest precursors in Egypt and Babylon through to the innovations of the Ionic, Sophistic, and Academic schools and their followers.
  • S. R. Slings E 8934 2254)

    S. R. Slings E 8934 2254)

    S. R. SLINGS HERMESIANAX AND THE TATTOO ELEGY (P. BRUX. INV. E 8934 AND P. SORB. INV. 2254) aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 98 (1993) 29–37 © Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 29 HERMESIANAX AND THE TATTOO ELEGY (P.BRUX. INV. E 8934 AND P.SORB. INV. 2254) For Dirk Schenkeveld A newly published Brussels papyrus makes a join with an already published Sorbonne papyrus of Hellenistic elegy; we owe this splendid discovery to M. Huys1. The find confirms an intuition of Barns and Lloyd-Jones that the poem is about tattooing an adversary with various unedifying scenes from mythology - this had been contradicted with unscholarly fervour by Giangrande and K. Alexander2. At the same time, it refutes a conjecture of Lloyd- Jones', namely that this poem is the work of Phanocles: until Huys' discovery, it was possible to suppose that Phanocles fr. 1 Powell, which ends with the Thracian women being tattooed by their husbands because of their murdering Orpheus, was an aition preceding a Dirae type elegy saying 'I will tattoo you likewise'. But the Brussels papyrus is quite clearly the beginning of a poem (cf. especially i 3 mnÆ!ontai éoida¤), so this attribution has lost what plausibility it may have had before Huys' discovery. All the same, the identification of the author with Phanocles has influenced the general judgement of the author's standing to an extent which, to my mind, is hardly justified. Papathomopoulos, the author of the editio princeps of the Sorbonne papyrus3, had diagnosed the poet as a minor, provincial versifier of the Hellenistic period.
  • 6 X 10. Three Lines .P65

    6 X 10. Three Lines .P65

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-83746-0 - Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician King Carl A. Huffman Index More information Select index of Greek words and phrases discussed in the text delf»v/delf, 64, 123, 125, 154 galnh, 66, 75, 491, 494–500, 504–05, 515 kanqa, 341 gr, 122–23 ll»triov, 194–95 gewmetrw, 567 nagka©wv, 396 gewmetrik, 232–33, 244 ndocov, 39–40 gewmetrik»v, 244 na©sqhtov, 449 nakmptw, 538 de»menoi, 217–18 naklw, 476–77 dicr»nou , 291 nakÅptw, 322 diagignÛskw, 58–59, 149–51 nalog©a, 179–81, 503, 529–37, 538; toÓ ­sou, diagnÛmen, xiv, 149 529–37 dignwsiv, 58–59, 149–51 nlogon, 179 digramma, 396, 566 namon, 291 d©aita, partn d©aitan , 300–01 nastrof, 123, 155 diallttw, 215 nepistmwn, 193–94 disthma, 166–67, 169, 181, 458 n»moiov, tn»moia , 436, 441–43 diatrib, 228–32 ntere©dw, 561 dunmenoi, 217–18 ntreisma, 297 dÅnamiv, 446 nt©lhyiv, 451 dusmcanov, 79, 348, 375, 379 nÛmalov, 513–15 nwmal»thv, 513 gg©gnomai, 539 »ristov, 511 e²dov, 93, 123, 226, 238, 250–51, 567; pqeia, 600, 603 (prÛtiston), 122 pantizw, 113, 156 e«kÛn, 601 planv, 542–43 kle©pw, 247 podeiktikäv, 375, 379 mp»diov, 335 p»deixiv, 71, 232, 237–38, mfusw, 113, 160 248–49 n aÉt, 222 podcomai, 503–04 nant©ov, 445 porov, 195 nargv, 71, 233, 236–37, 238, 246–47 pofrssw, 160 narm»zw, 351 riqmhtik, 240–44 xeur©skw, 193, 195, 196–200, 202 rmon©a, tperª tn rmon©an , 565 peiskwmzw, 314, 322 rc, 358, 500, 502, 598 piqumhtik»v, 93 rc kaª mhtr»poliv, 69 p©stamai, 196–200 %rcÅtav, 619 pistmwn, 193–94 stronomik»v, 244 pistthv, 389 aÎxh, 80, 386 pitelw, 72, 237–38, 247, 249 aÉt¼v fa, 55 pitmnw, 587 stÛ, 96 banausourg©a, 380 scatov oÉran»v, 87 638 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-83746-0 - Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician King Carl A.
  • MELEAGER and PHILIP AS EPIGRAM COLLECTORS Lorenzo

    MELEAGER and PHILIP AS EPIGRAM COLLECTORS Lorenzo

    MELEAGER AND PHILIP AS EPIGRAM COLLECTORS Lorenzo Argentieri 1. The Epigram Crisis in the Second Century B.C. Meleager is our source of knowledge for the most important period of Greek epigram. As both poet and editor, he created an anthology called the Garland (%c' #) at the beginning of the rst century B.C., comprising many epigrams by older poets, to which he added his own. Meleager’s decision to form such a collection represents a major departure from earlier Hellenistic practice, which had been satis ed with merely gathering together and cataloguing the works of past authors.1 A glance at the poets named by Meleager in the opening poem of the Garland (AP 4.1 = 1 GP) reveals a rather uneven chronological distribution. Here they are ranked by date of birth:2 Up to 350 B.C. Archilochus, Sappho, Anacreon, Simonides, Bacchylides, Plato, Erinna ca. 330–320 Anyte, Nossis, Moero, Leonidas, Asclepiades, Simias, Perses (?) ca. 310–300 Posidippus, Hedylus, Alexander Aetolus, Nicias, Cal- limachus, Aratus, Antagoras ca. 270 Euphorion, Rhianus, Hegesippus (?) ca. 250 Nicaenetus, Damagetus, Mnasalces, Dioscorides, Theo- doridas, Phaedimus (?) ca. 230–220 Samius, Alcaeus ca. 180 Antipater, Phanias, Polystratos It is remarkable that after including many poets of the third century B.C., he has only three from the second. This difference may be due to Meleager’s personal taste; he preferred third-century authors (rightly, to 1 Argentieri (1998: 2–4). 2 Revised from Page (1975: xi) and the introductions to individual poets in Gow- Page (1965). I do not deal with the thorny problem of epigrams ascribed to ancient authors (“up to 350”), which however Meleager held for genuine; see the introductions in Gow-Page (1965) to Sappho and Erinna, and Page (1980) for all the others, along with Sider in this volume.
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Poetry as window and mirror : Hellenistic poets on predecessors, contemporaries and themselves Klooster, J.J.H. Publication date 2009 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Klooster, J. J. H. (2009). Poetry as window and mirror : Hellenistic poets on predecessors, contemporaries and themselves. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:03 Oct 2021 INTRODUCTION Twenty years ago, Hellenistic literary studies were in a sorry state, judging by the introduction of Gregory Hutchinson’s 1988 book Hellenistic Poetry: The celebrated poets of the third century BC have not received much literary treatment; what is sadder, they seem fairly seldom to be read with much enjoyment and understanding.